EFF Explains Why Online Age Verification Differs from In-Person ID Checks
By
hn_acker
Master baker tier. Every paragraph earns its place on the tray.
Summary
The article argues against online age verification mandates by explaining why they differ fundamentally from in-person ID checks. It highlights privacy concerns, technical challenges, and the potential for surveillance and discrimination. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) opposes all forms of age verification mandates, advocating instead for privacy-preserving alternatives and emphasizing that online verification creates permanent digital records, enables mass surveillance, and disproportionately impacts marginalized communities.
Key quotes
· 4 pulledOne of the most common refrains we hear from age verification proponents is that online ID checks are nothing new. After all, you show your ID at bars and liquor stores all the time, right?
Online age verification is fundamentally different from showing your ID in person. When you show your ID at a bar, the bouncer looks at it, verifies it's you, and hands it back. That's it. No record is kept, no database is updated, no permanent trail is created.
Age verification mandates would require websites to collect sensitive personal information from all users, creating massive honeypots of data that would be irresistible targets for hackers and government surveillance.
The EFF opposes all forms of age verification mandates because they threaten privacy, free expression, and access to information for everyone, not just minors.
You might also wanna read
Age verification for social media bans threatens privacy for all users
Australia's decision to restrict social media access for children under 16 has sparked global debate, with similar proposals being discussed
Illinois HB5511: Privacy Advocates Warn Device-Level Age Verification Poses Security Risks
This article is an open letter opposing Illinois House Bill 5511 (The Children's Social Media Safety Act), arguing that while the bill aims
